| Author | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| ctype | Hey all, Anyone seen any cheap(ish) microsoft visual c++ 6 pro/ent? Every time i see one on eBay it goes WAY above my budget. I can understand y its so sought after - .NET is shite. i spent 20 quid on a copy of .net 2003 EA (copied) and aint used it more than like 3 times. Any links greatly appreciated. | April 22, 2005, 2:43 PM |
| Yegg | Why would you want to buy something? We are in the year 2005, download it. I have a copy of Microsoft Visual C++ Standard. I don't think Professional or Enterprise is all that worthwhile. Standard is good enough as it is. I have Visual Studio .NET Standard and it has plenty of features (if Pro and Enterprise are that much better, please tell me why). I think if you use a file sharing software you can maybe find a copy of Professional of Enterprise. | April 22, 2005, 4:58 PM |
| Quarantine | I use VS .NET Architect. | April 22, 2005, 5:24 PM |
| shout | [quote author=Warrior link=topic=11352.msg109434#msg109434 date=1114190658] I use VS .NET Architect. [/quote] I as well. | April 23, 2005, 2:04 AM |
| K | http://msdn.microsoft.com/academic/ | April 23, 2005, 3:10 AM |
| Newby | [quote author=Warrior link=topic=11352.msg109434#msg109434 date=1114190658] I use VS .NET Architect. [/quote] I use VS .NET 2003 Enterprise Architecht legally. | April 23, 2005, 4:18 AM |
| Quarantine | Yes, me too. It has a valid serial! | April 23, 2005, 4:31 AM |
| Myndfyr | [quote author=ctype link=topic=11352.msg109406#msg109406 date=1114180982] I can understand y its so sought after - .NET is shite.[/quote] And here is another example of someone who doesn't know what he's talking about. The VS.NET IDE is far superior to that of the VS6 IDE. Even if you don't want to use .NET -- it's not forced, you know, as you can still make Win32 applications -- you're still given a much more integrated interface. | April 23, 2005, 8:28 AM |
| shout | [quote author=MyndFyre link=topic=11352.msg109565#msg109565 date=1114244922] [quote author=ctype link=topic=11352.msg109406#msg109406 date=1114180982] I can understand y its so sought after - .NET is shite.[/quote] And here is another example of someone who doesn't know what he's talking about. The VS.NET IDE is far superior to that of the VS6 IDE. Even if you don't want to use .NET -- it's not forced, you know, as you can still make Win32 applications -- you're still given a much more integrated interface. [/quote] Is there a diffrence between the compilers in 6 and .NET? | April 24, 2005, 2:23 PM |
| Yegg | [quote author=Shout link=topic=11352.msg109692#msg109692 date=1114352609] [quote author=MyndFyre link=topic=11352.msg109565#msg109565 date=1114244922] [quote author=ctype link=topic=11352.msg109406#msg109406 date=1114180982] I can understand y its so sought after - .NET is shite.[/quote] And here is another example of someone who doesn't know what he's talking about. The VS.NET IDE is far superior to that of the VS6 IDE. Even if you don't want to use .NET -- it's not forced, you know, as you can still make Win32 applications -- you're still given a much more integrated interface. [/quote] I don't believe that there is. Is there a diffrence between the compilers in 6 and .NET? [/quote] | April 24, 2005, 5:26 PM |
| K | [quote author=Shout link=topic=11352.msg109692#msg109692 date=1114352609] [quote author=MyndFyre link=topic=11352.msg109565#msg109565 date=1114244922] [quote author=ctype link=topic=11352.msg109406#msg109406 date=1114180982] I can understand y its so sought after - .NET is shite.[/quote] And here is another example of someone who doesn't know what he's talking about. The VS.NET IDE is far superior to that of the VS6 IDE. Even if you don't want to use .NET -- it's not forced, you know, as you can still make Win32 applications -- you're still given a much more integrated interface. [/quote] Is there a diffrence between the compilers in 6 and .NET? [/quote] Yes. The .NET 2003 C++ compiler is far more standards compliant than 6 (I've heard figures of something like 70% vs. 96%); although you probably wont be coding any partial templates or some other things that 6 might fail at, you would notice when trying to compile something large and complex, like the boost library. | April 24, 2005, 9:48 PM |
| ColT | Would .NET be the same coding language as Visual C++ 6.0 or would it be a new language over that I would have to learn? | April 25, 2005, 12:04 AM |
| Yegg | .NET and VC++ are very different languages. | April 25, 2005, 12:13 AM |
| St0rm.iD | .NET is not a language, but if I think I know what you're talking about, then no; you can use regular C++. Want free, legal Visual C++? See http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/express/visualc/default.aspx | April 25, 2005, 12:24 AM |
| ColT | I'm talking about Visual C++.NET not overall .NET compared to Regular Visual C++ | April 25, 2005, 12:36 AM |
| Myndfyr | [quote author=ColT link=topic=11352.msg109798#msg109798 date=1114389382] I'm talking about Visual C++.NET not overall .NET compared to Regular Visual C++ [/quote] Again, you don't need to use .NET to use Visual C++ 7 (which is part of VS.NET). | April 25, 2005, 12:43 AM |
| Brandon | I would assume that they have differences in coding. I have used VB 6 and VB .net and there are plenty of differences that I have noticed. And seeing that it is an upgraded version... they probably upgraded some stuff, wouldn't you say? Meh, I have never used it before, but those are some assumptions. If you really want to know I am sure Google can answer your questions. ;D | May 11, 2005, 9:07 PM |